Paul Thomas Anderson

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism both old and new, as well as memorializing public figures we've lost.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Paul Thomas Anderson

#126 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Aug 06, 2014 3:03 pm

Why does Nicolas Winding Refn belong in an [overdone] discussion about American contemporary auteurs, again?

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Paul Thomas Anderson

#127 Post by Zot! » Wed Aug 06, 2014 3:32 pm

He's arguably part American....
Refn wrote:I grew up in New York so I’m not very Scandinavian. I have a Danish passport but I’m a New Yorker by heart now, said the director, who immigrated to the U.S. when he was 8 years old.

User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm

Re: Paul Thomas Anderson

#128 Post by Luke M » Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:09 pm

This is a fantastic read.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Paul Thomas Anderson

#129 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Aug 06, 2014 10:45 pm

I agree! I wish it were from a book on Anderson and not Cruise though, as it'd be great to get that sort of insight on the rest of his work.

User avatar
The Elegant Dandy Fop
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:25 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Paul Thomas Anderson

#130 Post by The Elegant Dandy Fop » Thu Aug 07, 2014 3:20 am

mfunk9786 wrote:I agree! I wish it were from a book on Anderson and not Cruise though, as it'd be great to get that sort of insight on the rest of his work.
Just enjoy the book on Cruise and RESPECT THE COCK!

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Paul Thomas Anderson

#131 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Nov 24, 2020 3:30 pm

Hard Eight is definitely the PTA film I've seen the least overall, but I've still viewed it a handful of times since the late 90s. Rewatching it again, the delivery of goods is even more impressive as PTA takes a page from Mamet, while still imbuing his individualized stamp of gravitation toward makeshift parental roles. I forgot how funny the interplay is, sourced from Reilly’s perfect casting without patronizing his character, and I can't see this film pulling off any of the humor without him filling the role. PTA's resistance to moralize the characters' circumstances from any external logic affirms his maturity as a filmmaker at such a young age. The love that is felt between all parties here may raise some red flags, but that doesn’t nullify their respective truths. This may be objectively head-scratching 'Love' but it's still equal Love defined on terms that don't demand, require, or care about our inclusivity to permit their dignity. In step with this anti-handholding approach, PTA trusts us to piece together Hall’s guilt without forcing it to rule his life.
SpoilerShow
The covering up of the blood on his cuff link isn’t a negative choice, it’s a signal that he will and has lived internally with his actions, and proposes that this is best uncovered in a different movie, if at all (apathy to this in a final confident gesture of taking it out of sight is deeply humanistic to Hall's character, and to any of us with skeletons in the closet that feel the fire burning at our feet to be conscious of them always- PTA validates the decision to look away). The film argues for a relativist mindful stance guiding our morality as significant only in how we feel in the moment. We don’t need to be honest in all of our affairs regarding superficial actions if they threaten to cloud the other truths that are more significant in the present- that Hall and Reilly love one another, and that Reilly and Paltrow love one another. This love is allowed to matter exclusively from Hall’s murdering past, and from any oversimplified selfish reasons that unfairly diagnose 'why' he helped Reilly in the first place. Those intentions are meaningless when the current affection is as strong as it is. Covering up the blood is a choice, but not necessarily a wrong one. Maybe some of the ‘honesty’ we search for ourselves is best left in another story too.

casadmack74
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:35 am

Re: Paul Thomas Anderson

#132 Post by casadmack74 » Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:47 am

showed one of my best friends Inherent Vice last night, he had never seen any of PTA’s movies but he loved it and wants to watch them all now. he had an interesting theory about the movie that I don’t think is true but couldn’t say for certain:
SpoilerShow
was Coy Bigfoot’s partner that Prussia killed?

I don’t think the timelines add up (seems like Indelicato died long before the events of the book/film, whereas Coy “died” immediately before the events of IV) but I can’t find a definitive answer anywhere. cheers!

Post Reply